
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey Thomas GOLA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-15841 Non-Argument Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    (October 11, 2017)
    George L. Beck, Jr., Kevin P. Davidson, John J. Geer, III, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Sandra J. Stewart, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Montgomery, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jeffrey Thomas Gola, Pro Se
    Before MARCUS, WILLIAM PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey Gola appeals the denial of his motion for free transcripts. Gola moved for transcripts of his change of plea hearing and his sentencing hearing, which he has since received. Because “it is impossible for [this] court to grant [Gola] any effectual relief,” United States v, Serrapio, 754 F.3d 1312, 1317 (11th Cir. 2014) (quoting Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int’l Union, Local 1000, 567 U.S. 298, 307, 132 S.Ct. 2277, 183 L.Ed.2d 281 (2012)), we dismiss as moot that part of his appeal challenging the denial of trial transcripts. Gola also moved for a transcript of a hearing about his mental fitness to prepare a collateral challenge to his sentence, see 28 U.S.C. § 2255, but we cannot say that the denial of Gola’s motion was an abuse of discretion, see United States v. Quinn, 123 F.3d 1415, 1425 (11th Cir. 1997). Gola “is not entitled to obtain copies of court records at the government’s expense to search for possible defects merely because he is an indigent.” United States v. Herrera, 474 F.2d 1049, 1049 (5th Cir. 1973). Gola argues that the denial of the transcripts constitutes discrimination based on his mental disability, in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, but Gola must present that issue in a civil action, not in a postjudgment motion in a criminal case.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART.  