In State v. Hopkins, 196 Wis. 2d 36, 42, 538 N.W.2d 543 (Ct. App. 1995), the presentence investigation report indicated certain restitution amounts. See id. at 41. At sentencing, neither the State nor the defendant mentioned restitution; however, when the trial court imposed its sentence, it also ordered restitution consistent with the amounts noted in the presentence report. See Hopkins, 196 Wis. 2d at 43-44. The defendant did not object to the restitution, and the trial court entered the judgment of conviction. See id. It was not until postconviction motions that the defendant sought to vacate the restitution order. See id. The Hopkins court recognized: "In the absence of any objection to amounts claimed on a court-ordered restitution summary accompanying a presentence investigation, where a defendant has been given notice of the contents of that report and summary, the trial court is entitled to proceed on the understanding that the claimed amount is not in dispute, and so order restitution under 973.20(13) .... " (Id. at 42.) Because Hopkins received notice via the presentence report and further, failed to contest restitution at sentencing, this court determined that "his failure to contest the issue at sentencing constituted a 'constructive' stipulation to the restitution order." Hopkins, 196 Wis. 2d at 44.