AMENDED ORDER

DAVID S. DOTY, District Judge.

This matter is before the court upon the objections by defendant Ramon Rafael Alarcon to the April 26, 2016, report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes. In his report, the magistrate judge recommends denying Alarcon's motion to quash the warrant and to suppress evidence. The magistrate judge concluded that there was probable cause to support the warrant and disagreed that the warrant was impermissibly extraterritorial. Alarcon timely objected.

The court reviews the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). Following a careful review of the file, record, and proceedings herein, the court concludes that the well-reasoned report and recommendation correctly disposes of defendant's motion. With respect to probable cause, the court finds that the issuing court is owed substantial deference on review. United States v. Hudspeth, 525 F.3d 667, 674 (8th Cir. 2008). Nevertheless, the court has reviewed the search warrant affidavit and finds it sufficient to establish probable cause.1 The court also concludes that the Minnesota court had authority to order the tracking of Alarcon's cell phone beyond Minnesota's borders.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The R&R [ECF No. 191] is adopted in its entirety;

2. The objections to the R&R [ECF No. 194] are overruled;

3. The motion to quash warrant and suppress evidence [ECF No. 179] is denied; and

4. The request for oral argument is denied.