When determining whether a delinquent is eligible for commitment to the Division of Juvenile Facilities (DJF) under Welfare and Institutions Code section 733, the “most recent sustained petition” does not include petitions filed in other states. In 2008, minor Albert admitted an allegation in a Welfare and Institutions Code section 602 petition that he committed second degree robbery. He was thereafter sent to live with his father in Louisiana, where Louisiana delinquency petitions alleging various offenses were sustained against him. The minor returned to his mother in California, where he was charged with a number of violations of probation (VOP). The minor admitted an allegation in a VOP petition that he committed a residential burglary in 2010, and the remaining allegations were dismissed. He was committed to DJF over his objection. On appeal, he argued that his DJF commitment was improper because the most recent sustained petition filed against him in Louisiana did not allege an offense that would fall under Welfare and Institutions Code section 707, subdivision (b) if committed in California. Held: Affirmed. Section 733 precludes DJF commitments where the most recent offense alleged in any petition and admitted or found true by the court is not a section 707, subdivision (b) offense. Applying rules of statutory construction, the Court of Appeal concluded that the “petition” referenced in section 733 is a section 602 petition, filed for violations of state or federal law in California and found true by a California juvenile court. Absent explicit Legislative indication, statutes do not apply extraterritorially and section 733 is not written so as to encompass foreign delinquency petitions. Here, there was no dispute that Albert’s most recent offense alleged in a California section 602 petition was robbery, which is a section 707, subdivision (b) offense.