, In re Johnson, 931 N.W.2d 649, 656 (Minn. App. 2019) (holding that individual committed as SDP and SPP had no constitutional right to appointed counsel on Rule 60.02 motion for a new trial and affirming denial of motion as untimely and deficient on the merits), review denied (Minn. Sept. 17, 2019); In re Dean, No. A19-0122, 2019 WL 3407166 at *2 (Minn. App. July 29, 2019) (affirming denial of motion to withdraw stipulation to commitment as an SDP because it was untimely), pet. for review filed (Minn. Aug. 19, 2019); In re Wilson, No A19-0163, 2019 WL 3294078 at *2-3 (Minn. App. July 22, 2019) (affirming denial of Rule 60.02 motion for a new trial because individual committed as both SDP and sexual psychopathic personality "failed to present even a fact question as to the adequacy of his former attorney's performance" and "ha[d] not demonstrated that any shortfalls in his attorney's performance negatively affected the outcome of the commitment trial"); In re Newman, No. A18-1691, 2019 WL 3293793 at *2-3 (Minn. App. July 22, 2019) (affirming denial of Rule 60.02 motion for a new trial because it was untimely and because ineffective-assistance claim lacked merit).