There are some people on this thread arguing that the man should be released because he is not obligated to identify himself. The illegal immigrant example is the consequence that would result.
Failure to identify yourself is not a crime. The crime is that they have not taken him before a magistrate as the Utah law requires.
If he were thought to be an illegal alien then he still does not have to identify himself, it is for the courts to decide if he is here legally or not, or if he is a criminal.
What is this country coming to if people like you think it is a good idea for someone to be held indefinitely just because he isn’t doing what he is told. If he has committed a crime, they don’t need his name, they can try him as a John Doe. I swear you people think the constitution should be thrown out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada