Last night, at the Bar Association Christmas Party, I brought this proposed law up. The defense attorneys were quick to point out the Fourth and Fifth Amendment implications of this law, in that it would seem to give officers a free pass around the Fourth Amendment, by allowing them to stop and detain an individual without probable cause, or more accurately, without reasonable suspicion under Terry v. Ohio. It would then comel the subkject to speak with the officers, in terms of identifying information. Now, the judges pointed out that the Fifth Amendment does not cover name and identifying information, but the Fourth Amendment implications are clear. As is the potential for abuse, especially in terms of drug interdiction, especially if it actually requires an I.D., and not just the information.
Imagine a cop goes to a known drug area. Walks up to a person to ask for I..D. Person cannot produce I.D., so will be taken in to verify I.D., and is patted down for officer safety incident to the arrest, resulting in the discovery of drugs. Better yet, when word of this spreads, the subjects (knowing they have dope in a pocket) run when the police approach, knowing they don't have I.D., and then you get a violent encounter, Taser use, etc.
All I can say is the judges around central Ohio aren't looking at this with friendly attitudes. Then again, a brief talk with other prosecutors got similar cold reception.