California Penal Code (PC) § 148(a)(1) states:
148. (a) (1) Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
So the question here is whether you willfully resisted, delayed, or obstructed the officer in discharging his/her duties. You were a driver of a vehicle that had just been in an accident. The officer requested that you provide your license. You are obligated to provide the license upon demand of the police officer by California Vehicle Code (VC) section 12951(b). When asked for your license, you did not comply with that VC provision but instead asked the officer if you were being detained. The officer’s warning that you were about to be detained was a pretty clear indicator that you were testing his patience and that he expected you to promptly provide the license as asked. You again failed to provide the license and instead again asked why you were being detained. There is therefore an argument to be made that you did indeed delay the officer. He wanted to see your license, which state law says you have to provide to him upon demand, i.e. immediately when he asks for it. You instead entered into some verbal games about detention and purposefully did not comply with the officer’s request. While not a slam dunk for the state as all the details do matter, based on your own description of events I wouldn’t automatically agree that you did not willfully delay the officer either.
The court will be interested in any evidence that bears on the issue before the court: whether or not you willfully resisted, delayed, or obstructed the police officer. You want to get in discovery at least whatever evidence the state will use against you other than the officer’s testimony, i.e. any video of the encounter, etc. While you can ask for copies of procedures and instructions for traffic cases, I fail to see how that is likely to help you. The officer is allowed to ask for your license and it is pretty much standard practice for officers to do that in any traffic stop or accident situation. And it was that request that apparently sparked the exchange that lead to your situation now.
As for a Pitchess motion, that is commonly done when there is some indication that the defendant was the subject of some kind of police misconduct. But your statement of facts does not suggest any kind of misconduct occurred here. Absent something more than you have said here, the court may well reject you motion. Even if granted, what do you think you’d find in the personnel records of the officer to help you? The whole idea of the motion is to look for evidence of repeated wrongdoing to support your contention that the officer acted wrongly in your case, too. But you need to first be able to identify what conduct you believe was wrongful before you can search for records of other instances of the same kind of misconduct. In other words, right now this sounds to me more like you are going on a fishing expedition here more than anything else.
I strongly recommend you not represent yourself and that you get a lawyer to handle this for you. If you are not well versed in California law and court procedures you will be at a great disadvantage compared to the prosecutor. Moreover, your own bias in the case may blind you to things you need to see and consider in the case. In part for that reason even most lawyers will not represent themselves in a criminal matter. I certainly wouldn’t represent myself in a criminal matter. If you qualify for a public defender, seize that opportunity and get the PD to represent you.