OPINION

Jesse Bond, Jr., was convicted, by jury verdict, of (1) forcible rape with substantial bodily harm (NRS 200.366; NRS 193.015); (2) the infamous crime against nature (NRS 201.190); and, (3) battery (NRS 200.481). Bond’s central contention in this appeal is that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for rape with substantial bodily harm. Subordinately, he argues the enhanced penalty statute is inapplicable when, as here, a life sentence has been imposed.

1. We reject Bond’s first contention for the same reason we stated in Hankins v. State, 91 Nev. 477-478, 538 P.2d 167, 168 (1975), where we reiterated the long standing rule that “ ‘[w]here there is substantial evidence to support a verdict in a criminal case, as the record indicates in this case, the reviewing court will not disturb the verdict nor set aside the judgment.’ ”

2. We also reject Bond’s contention that the enhanced penalty statute (NRS 193.165) is inapplicable when a life sentence is imposed. That statute mandates enhancement of any “term *220of imprisonment prescribed by statute.”1 Cf. Woofter v. O’Donnell, 91 Nev. 756, 542 P.2d 1396 (1975).

Affirmed.