Mario Saavedra appealed from the judgment of the county court of Burleigh County which found him guilty of five offenses of driving while his license was under suspension. We reverse and remand for a new trial on all five offenses.

Mario was charged with five separate offenses of driving while his license was under suspension, in violation of Bismarck City Ordinance No. 35-8. He was represented by court-appointed counsel in the Bismarck municipal court, where he was found guilty of all five offenses. He appealed the convictions to the county court for trial anew [see Section 40-18-19, N.D. C.C.] and requested that the municipal court appoint counsel. The attorneys who represented Mario in the municipal court requested that they be allowed to withdraw as Mario’s counsel, and the court granted their requests. The municipal court did not appoint new counsel for Mario’s appeal to the county court. When the county court convened, it made no inquiry regarding appointment of counsel for Mario. Mario appeared pro se, and was again convicted of all five charges of driving while his license was under suspension and was sentenced to 15 days’ actual incarceration. After trial, Mario was informed by the county court that he was entitled to the assistance of court-appointed counsel for his appeal to this court.

Mario was entitled to court-appointed counsel [see Rule 44, N.D.R. Crim.P.] and he did not waive that right. Counsel for the City concedes that Mario is entitled to a new trial at which he should be represented by court-appointed counsel.1 *456Therefore, we reverse and remand to the county court for a new trial at which Mario Saavedra is to be represented by court-appointed counsel, if he is determined to be indigent, unless Mario waives such right or unless no actual incarceration is imposed if he is convicted. See Rule 44, N.D.R. Crim.P.; Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367, 99 S.Ct. 1158, 59 L.Ed.2d 383 (1979).