In action by plaintiff alleging that defendants-police officers used excessive force when arresting him that caused him to injure his finger, and that defendants further denied him medical attention that caused him to have said finger amputated, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence that plaintiff used heroin on day of his arrest where said evidence was relevant on issue as to level of plaintiff’s pain and suffering that arose out of defendant’s alleged conduct. Moreover, said evidence was not unfairly prejudicial where record contained other properly admitted evidence of plaintiff’s drug use. Also, while prosecutor improperly tied defendant’s use of heroin to his actions on day of arrest (since said evidence was admitted only on damages issues), any error did not require reversal where plaintiff’s objection to single comment was sustained, and Dist. Ct. gave sufficient curative instruction.