In section 1983 action alleging that defendants-police officials subjected plaintiff to false arrest and malicious prosecution arising out of attempted murder and firearm charges to which plaintiff was ultimately acquitted, Dist. Ct. did not err in permitting defendants to question plaintiff about his prior use of alias and to elicit testimony about presence of “gangbangers” in apartment defendant had been occupying. Although Dist. Ct. had granted plaintiff’s motion in limine that limited defendants’ references to plaintiff’s criminal background or gang membership, Dist. Ct.’s ruling did not prohibit defendants from presenting evidence of plaintiff’s use of alias during events that led to instant criminal charges. Moreover, instant reference to gang activity did not violate motion in limine ruling since said evidence did not explicitly refer to plaintiff’s own gang membership.