With all of the hoopla surrounding U.S. v. Vick, I had found myself looking for a piece of information that I had yet to see in the press. Specifically, there had been a great deal of press coverage about Michael Vick's attorneys, but I found it very difficult to find any information on his co-defendants' attorneys. The co-defendants have, it seems, been relatively dependent upon Vick, and so I wondered who would be providing their defense. Additionally, I wondered if it was likely that loyalties would be impacted

I still wonder that, but I now know that they do indeed have separate attorneys. This was largely confirmation of legal theory I've learned; I had a difficult time imagining the U.S. wouldn't file to disqualify any duplicate attorneys, and the judge would likely do so. As a result, I was surprised to read this:

Daniel Ray "Meach" Meachum, an Atlanta attorney, filed paperwork today in U.S. District Court to represent Vick. Meachum is listed to also represent Vick's co-defendants, Quanis Phillips, Purnell Peace and Tony Taylor.

However, I think that may have been an error, which makes sense. In particular, the Pacer entries don't mention it:

07/26/2007 10 MOTION for Daniel Ray Meachum to appear Pro hac vice on behalf of Michael D. Vick. Fee paid, receipt #300001405. (cgar, ) Additional attachment[RECEIPT] added on 7/26/2007 (cgar, ). (Entered: 07/26/2007)
07/26/2007 11 SO ORDER granting 9 10 Motions for Pro hac vice. Appointed William Robert Martin and Daniel Ray Meachum as to Michael Vick (4). Signed by Judge Henry E. Hudson on 7/26/2007. (cgar, ) (Entered: 07/26/2007)

Of course, the interesting news from Pacer has hit the news sites:

Set Hearings as to Tony Taylor: Plea Agreement Hearing set for 7/30/2007 at 9:00 AM before District Judge Henry E. Hudson (rpiz) (Entered: 07/27/2007)

And that possibility is, of course, why distinct counsel is required in most cases.