[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, seriously, it's a misdeal.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, seriously, it's not a misdeal. At least not in most places.

Here's how it works in my room, YMMV:

If there's been no action and the player hasn't looked, the floor picks one that then becomes the burn.

If there's been no action and the player has looked, sometimes it's a dead hand and sometimes the floor picks one and exposes it and it becomes the burn.

If there's been action, the floor picks one for the burn and kills the hand.

Keep in mind I may be wrong on the second two, or it may vary by floorperson, but I know it's never a misdeal. (...unless more than one person has the improper number)

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is standard but I'll have to go through the various scenarios.

If the third card is the last card dealt, e.g. either the button gets two cards at the end or the dealer keeps dealing past the button to the SB, then I think your procedure of the dealer chosing a card as the burn card is correct.

If a player gets two cards in a row but the deal can be stopped and the correct extra card can be given to the proper player, then there should be no misdeal for that (before anybody looks at the cards of course.)

If the deal includes two or more extra cards, that is clearly a misdeal. Although if you can clearly identify which two cards they were like the first to SB and the second to BB, you should be able to back that up and restore order.

I believe it would also be a misdeal if the extra card was not clearly the last on dealt like UTG had three cards. This would be due to causing cards to be dealt out of sequence. And it should be obvious that an out of sequence event occurred if a player like UTG has three cards while the button or SB getting an extra last card can be rectified.

And finally, the player with three cards will have his hand declared dead if there is action by the first two players after the blinds before he stops the game.