Code coverage tools, such as Emma, Cobertura, and Clover, will instrument your code and record which parts of it gets invoked by running a suite of tests. This is very useful, and should be an integral part of your development process. It will help you identify how well your test suite covers your code.
However, this is not the same as identifying real dead code. It only identifies code that is covered (or not covered) by tests. This can give you false positives (if your tests do not cover all scenarios) as well as false negatives (if your tests access code that is actually never used in a real world scenario).
I imagine the best way to really identify dead code would be to instrument your code with a coverage tool in a live running environment and to analyse code coverage over an extended period of time.
If you are runnning in a load balanced redundant environment (and if not, why not?) then I suppose it would make sense to only instrument one instance of your application and to configure your load balancer such that a random, but small, portion of your users run on your instrumented instance. If you do this over an extended period of time (to make sure that you have covered all real world usage scenarios - such seasonal variations), you should be able to see exactly which areas of your code are accessed under real world usage and which parts are really never accessed and hence dead code.
I have never personally seen this done, and do not know how the aforementioned tools can be used to instrument and analyse code that is not being invoked through a test suite - but I am sure they can be.