Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A review of the record indicates that the evidence in question was properly seized. There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the police used his vehicle's defective taillight as a pretext to approach. Having observed a traffic violation, the police properly approached the defendant's vehicle and asked him for his license and registration (see, People v. Ellis, 62 N.Y.2d 393, 396). The police were also justified in approaching the vehicle since an articulable basis to inquire was present: to wit, defendant and his vehicle matched a description previously furnished to the police in connection with the use of a stolen credit card at a nearby gasoline station and the defendant was observed in a high-frequency drug area in a suspicious situation (see, People v. Harrison, 57 N.Y.2d 470, 481; People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223). The defendant's statement "it's only a little pot. It's mine" when the officer observed a plastic bag of marihuana on the center console (see, People v Gavin, 115 A.D.2d 618) provided probable cause to arrest the defendant and to conduct a search incidental thereto (see, People v. Troiano, 35 N.Y.2d 476, 478), since the police had reason to believe the vehicle might contain evidence related to the crime for which defendant was arrested (see, People v. Belton, 55 N.Y.2d 49, 55, rearg denied 56 N.Y.2d 646). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.