Shouldn't you be providing states WITH laws making it illegal to not ID, instead of asking for proof of a negative. You know better than that.
Wikipedia has a decent "
Stop and Identify Statutes" page. I think it would be great if everyone reviewed the page and corrected anything there that you find to be incorrect for your state. That way the information is all in one place rather than being buried in some soon-to-be-obscure page on OCDO.
The Florida information on that page appears to be correct. In Florida it's kind of an odd situation. If the officer has RAS, under F.S. 901.151 the officer "may temporarily detain such person for the purpose of ascertaining the identity of the person temporarily detained and the circumstances surrounding the person’s presence abroad which led the officer to believe that the person had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a criminal offense". The statute however provides no criminal penalty for failing to identify yourself. Presumably if the officer has statutory authority to ascertain your identity, he may be allowed to detain you until until such time as he has accomplished that purpose (would depend upon case law I suppose). I would think that if you answer "my name is
Your Real Name Here" then he has identified you. I suppose it's his problem as to whether or not he believes you.
The other "ID related" statute is F.S. 856.021 which relates to Loitering and Prowling. It appears that this statute has been used to impose criminal consequences for failure to identify, but only when you are specifically suspected of loitering or prowling.
Personally I think the best course of conduct is to establish whether or not the officer is detaining you by asking if you are free to leave, and if he won't answer, then attempt to leave (slowly, deliberately, and while announcing the fact into your recorder). If the officer verbally or physically halts your attempt to leave, be sure that your recorder captures you saying "by your having grabbed my arm / blocked my path / given me a verbal command to remain / etc., you have indicated I am being detained - what is your reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime to detain me". He may not answer - in my opinion that just helps you when you file your lawsuit after the fact. If he says you're detained, you're detained. I've read at least one Florida attorney who said you are allowed to resist an unlawful detention without violence, but of course that's a dice game because (as pointed out earlier) hey may concoct a suitable RAS later and then your obstruction or a "resisting without" charge will be more likely to stick.
I don't know what constitutes "identifying yourself" for purposes of Florida case law. I think if I provide my true name and DOB I have identified myself.
If the officer says I am detained and does not state what his RAS is, I probably would push the point now and again that he has not articulated his suspicion and the detention appears to be an unlawful seizure and I will not cooperate with an unlawful seizure. I don't know how much good it does to simply say "am I free to go" over and over. I definitely like the tactic of "I will not answer any questions without an attorney present so you should not ask me any", followed by "why do you keep asking me questions when I have already told you I want an attorney present" if they do.
Regarding recording the encounter, Florida is an "all parties consent" state. That means notification is not sufficient, all parties being recorded must
consent to the recording. The Florida wiretapping statute (which also covers "in person" oral communications) does not apply when a person is in a public place where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. However there was a case in 2005 (don't know the cite right off) where one court said that if the interaction with the police was in a place where they would have a reasonable expectation of privacy, then recording them would be a crime (a felony by the way). For this reason while you are recording the police in Florida, I think it would be clever to say "I can't believe you're willing to act this way in public, don't you know other people can hear every word you're saying" which will probably prompt a reply along the lines of "I don't care who hears me" (or the like). Poof. No reasonable expectation of privacy.
What would be super nice would be a Wiki of some sort that had all of the relevant statutes and case law for "stop and identify", recording, obstruction, resisting, etc., state-by-state, in one place. Maybe a "Police Interaction" page on Wikipedia.org that experts from all over would improve and keep current over time?
Anyway, I rambled a bit there - sorry about that.