The government’s CI was handling the package with drugs for the defendant to ship it, and he could consent to searching it. Erickson v. State, 2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 140 (March 29, 2017).
The CI’s information was against his self interest. Yes, he had a motive to lie, but if he did it would have been to his own detriment in resolving his own case. Therefore, there was enough to credit for probable cause for the warrant. There was misleading conclusory information in there, but excluding it still leaves probable cause. State v. Kadri, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 1125 (5th Dist. Feb. 1, 2017).*