Cellular Analysis Expert’s Testimony Involving the Use of CDR and TAR Admitted
Posted on November 18, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler
The Defendant, Jerry Ray Brown, was charged with one count of attempted bank robbery.
Brown ostensibly attempted to take by force, violence, and intimidation from the person and in the presence of bank employees, money belonging to and in the care, custody, control, management, and possession of the FNB Community Bank in Choctaw, Oklahoma.
Defendant filed a motion in limine challenging the testimony of Special Agent Andrew Kerstetter.
Cellular Analysis Expert Witness
Andrew Kerstetter has been with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Oklahoma City since October 2007. As a Special Agent with FBI, he is a member of the FBI’s Cellular Analysis Survey Team (CAST) program, is assigned to the Oklahoma City Safe Streets Task Force and Violent Crime Squad and has participated in numerous types of FBI investigations.
Discussion by the Court
Defendant did not appear to contend that any particular methodology employed by Agent Kerstetter failed under Daubert. Rather, Defendant contended that CAST analyses in general are not based on reliable scientific principles and cannot be used to “pinpoint” Defendant’s location. However, as stated above, the government has clarified that the CAST analysis did not pinpoint Defendant’s phone at a precise location, but only placed the phone in a general location.
Defendant also argued that the CAST analysis “is based on the false assumption that a cell phone connects or is located to the closest cell phone tower at the time a call is placed or received.” However, the government’s explanation of Agent Kerstetter’s CAST analysis did not support Defendant’s argument.
Based on the government’s description of Kerstetter’s testimony, the Court anticipated that Kerstetter’s report would analyze the subject phone’s call detail records (‘CDRs’) and timing advance records (‘TARs’) to approximate the distance between the phone and connecting tower in order to provide a general location.
Other courts have deemed such analyses of CDRs and TARs sufficiently reliable under Daubert.
Held
The Court denied the Defendant’s motion in limine challenging the testimony of Andrew Kerstetter.
Key Takeaway:
As noted by the government, courts routinely allow expert testimony involving cell-tower analyses to determine the general location of a phone, provided that proper foundation for the testimony is laid.
Case Details:
| Case Caption: | USA V. Brown |
| Docket Number: | 5:25cr188 |
| Court Name: | United States District Court, Oklahoma Western |
| Order Date: | October 31, 2025 |
