I'm a fan of using the right tool for the job, and I think people get overly pedantic about not using goto, for nothing more than some cargo-cult notion that goto == bad programming. It's a valid statement that was included into the language for a reason, and there are times when it makes no sense to bend your code into contortions to prevent using a syntactic element that boils down to the same instruction the compiler will probably end up using anyway to undo the "not technically goto" code you otherwise have to write.
E.g., break and while(1) are synonymous with goto. So why not use whatever makes the code easiest to understand, and forget all the BS stigma? Good and bad code can be written in any language by any one with any collection of statements. The anti-goto movement was borne out of a desire to avoid spaghetti code and has been blown so far out of proportion that folks will honestly prefer an intricate series of flag variables and state checks just to say they didn't use goto. Does that really make things any cleaner / easier / better / faster?
A program exists to perform a task first, and be as obvious as possible to human beings that have to maintain it, second. Those are the true goals of programming. Anything that helps achieve those goals is fair game, IMO.
BUT...
I don't see where goto fits in this problem. You can't goto out of a function, for example. (Please no one bring up long jumps... DOH! That is truly a tool for a very specific job.)