A federal military appeals court has affirmed the conviction of a Navy Master Chief who claimed he was “squared away” after skipping a mandatory drug test. The Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals released an opinion Monday upholding the findings against Master Chief Hospital Corpsman Brian E. Wenzel.
The case centered on a two-word text message sent following a series of missed urinalysis screenings at Naval Hospital Jacksonville in July 2023.
Court documents reveal that Wenzel’s name appeared on random urinalysis lists three times within a 12-day span. On July 7, Wenzel was excused after informing leadership he was attending a conference. On July 13, he was granted “sick in quarters” status after reporting a severe flare-up of irritable bowel syndrome.
READ: Federal Court Rejects Georgia Voters’ Challenge Over State Election Rolls
Finally, on July 19, Wenzel’s name appeared a third time while he was serving as the chair for a Junior Sailor of the Quarter board at a nearby clinic during the testing window. According to the record, Wenzel did not provide a sample during this third window and was instead marked as “alternate worksite” on the official register.
At noon on July 19, an hour after the testing window closed, Command Master Chief “Delta” texted Wenzel, asking if he had provided a sample that morning. Wenzel replied with the phrase, “Squared away.”
Command Master Chief Delta testified that he initially interpreted the response as a confirmation that the test was completed, but he later discovered the “alternate worksite” notation on the register.
While Delta eventually testified that he did not believe the response was a lie once he received a later explanation, the military judge maintained that the statement was a deceptive official act.
Wenzel’s defense argued that the statement was technically true because he had obtained a valid excusal, meaning his legal obligation was “squared away.”
They cited a 2025 Supreme Court ruling, Thompson v. United States, which noted that misleading statements are not always legally false. However, the appellate court’s majority opinion, delivered by Senior Judge Harrell, found the context of the question was specific to the act of providing a sample.
Harrell wrote that while Wenzel could have been squared away in other contexts, he was not squared away in the only context that mattered, as he did not provide a urine sample that morning.
READ: Court Rules New Jersey Attorney General Isn’t Footing The Bill For Prosecutor’s Ethics Battle
The ruling was not unanimous, as Judge McCoy issued a dissenting opinion arguing that Wenzel had indeed met his legal obligations by being excused. McCoy wrote that once Wenzel was excused from his obligation, he had placed everything into order, noting that Navy manuals define “square away” as putting things in proper shipshape.
McCoy argued that a literally true, but unresponsive, answer should not constitute a crime. Despite the dissent, the court affirmed the conviction for making a false official statement.
Wenzel had previously been acquitted of charges related to the wrongful use of controlled substances and avoiding the July 19 test, and his sentence resulted in no punishment.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
