That is your OPINION. Your opinion runs counter to the Supreme Court, and the laws and state Constitution of Utah.
- - - -
No it isn’t, it is the law. All states (including Utah) allow for a person to be tried as a John or Jane Doe.
The statute only makes failure to give name a Class B Misdemeanor, this man should have been given a lawyer (btw, you aren’t a lawyer are you because an attorney wouldn’t make such a stupid comment), and the lawyer is under no compulsion to reveal his clients name. He can be tried as a “John Doe” and should have already been arraigned and given counsel which doesn’t appear to have happened.
BTW, my husband researched the Utah code and found that the OFFICER is guilty of the same class misdemeanor for not bringing the man before a judge ‘swiftly’.
If he does not give his name (according to the law) he is guilty of a misdemeanor, that does not mean he can be held without charges indefinitely (false imprisonment). What you are advocating is a communist tactic of control.
Given the option of 'control' versus 'anarchy' - I'll chose control every time. I'm a proponent of order, you prefer chaos. This is not an onerous chore, providing simple identification. He is not claiming mental incompetence, and there is no requirement for producing 'legitimate' documentation.
And once again - he can leave any time he wants. He simply has to say "My name is ....". Until then, he is in a self-imposed 'holding pattern'.