Renteria, and Bernabe to the location where the drugs were purported to be held. During the drive, Sergeant Brawner instructed Investigator West to stop the car in which Appellant was riding. The confidential informant had been used before by Sergeant Brawner and had provided reliable information in the past. The informant called Renteria with Sergeant Brawner present. In that conversation, the informant and Renteria scheduled a time and place to meet. After the meeting, the informant signaled that he had seen the money intended to buy cocaine. We hold this evidence along with the reasonable inferences to be drawn from it is sufficient to create a reasonable suspicion that Appellant and the other occupants of the vehicle were violating the law. See Sailo, 910 S.W.2d at 188-89 (<HOLDING>). Appellant argues that the informant was not
holding experts experience knowledge and training is considered in determining reliability holding informants veracity reliability and basis of knowledge are highly relevant to inquiry holding that knowledge possessed by officials of the united states may be highly relevant such knowledge may show that the defendant did not submit its claim in deliberate ignorance or reckless disregard of the truth holding that a federal courts inquiry into the reliability of expert testimony is flexible and may depend upon a variety of considerations holding that the relevant time of inquiry is the date of the filing of the complaint