What is the test for a judge to increase a defendant's sentence after a new trial?

that "vindictiveness against a defendant for having successfully attacked his first conviction must play no part in the sentence he receives after a new trial." (Id. at p. 725.) Thus, "whenever a judge imposes a more severe sentence upon a defendant after a new trial, the reasons for his doing so must affirmatively appear." (Id. at p. 726.) The stated reasons "must be based upon objective information concerning identifiable conduct on the part of the defendant occurring after the time of the original sentencing proceeding. And the factual data upon which the increased sentence is based must be made part of the record, so that the constitutional legitimacy of the increased sentence may be fully reviewed on appeal." (Ibid.) A presumption of vindictiveness is only applicable when there is "a 'reasonable likelihood' [citation] that the increase in sentence is the product of actual vindictiveness on the part of the sentencing authority." (Alabama v. Smith (1989) 490 U.S. 794, 799.)