In State v. Wilkinson, 202 Ariz. 27, 39 P.3d 1131 (2002), an unlicensed contractor was convicted of two misdemeanor charges of acting in the capacity of a contractor without a license. Id. at 28, P3, 39 P.3d at 1132. The city court ordered, as part of his criminal sentence, that he pay restitution to the victims. Id. On appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court held that, pursuant to the criminal restitution statutes, the unlicensed contractor could be ordered to repay the amounts he had received from the victims, as these sums were the "direct" result of his criminal conduct - acting as a contractor without a license. Id. at 29, P9, 39 P.3d at 1133. Nevertheless, the court held that the sentencing court could not order restitution for "consequential" damages, such as the expenses incurred because the defendant failed to complete the work or performed substandard work. Id. at P10.