foreach my $foo (@bars) {
  {
    if ($foo =~ /baz/i) {
      last unless $foo eq uc $foo;
    } else {
      last unless $foo ne uc $foo;
    }
    # stuff
  }
  do_more_stuff($foo);
}

[download]
works just fine. There are several other options as well. First there is the continue that you mentioned: 
foreach my $foo (@foos) {
  if ($foo =~ /baz/i) {
    next unless $foo eq uc $foo;
  } else {
    next unless $foo ne uc $foo;
  }
  # stuff
} continue {
  do_more_stuff($foo);
}

[download]
and then (depending on what you do in the if statement) there is reversing the order of your operations: 
foreach my $foo (@foos) {
  do_more_stuff($foo);

  if ($foo =~ /baz/i) {
    next unless $foo eq uc $foo;
  } else {
    next unless $foo ne uc $foo;
  }
  # stuff
}

[download]
You can have the chain of ifs be replaced by a function call that returns from multiple points: 
foreach my $foo (@foos) {
  do_stuff($foo);
  do_more_stuff($foo);
}

sub do_stuff {
  my $foo = shift;

  if ($foo =~ /baz/i) {
    return unless $foo eq uc $foo;
  } else {
    return unless $foo ne uc $foo;
  }
  # stuff
}

[download]
And so on.

I have, in fact, used every one of these solutions except the goto one, and I prefer all of them to the goto solution. Why? Because I find each of them clearer, they allow me to see program flow in terms of following blocks. The goto forces me to see an element of program flow which is not some form of block. I don't like that. Furthermore, no matter how clearly the goto solution's intention may be, its use opens up the possibility of traps like this: 

foreach (1..5) {
  print "Hello\n";
  goto DONE;
}
DONE:

foreach (1..5) {
  print "World\n";
  goto DONE;
}
DONE:

[download]
By contrast anything only relying on return and loop control statements can be much more easily verified correct based on local examination. (OK, in this case your goto construct is verifiably correct without looking at outside code. But it will take more time for most people to figure out why the one is verifiably OK while the other is demonstrably bad than it will to figure out my alternate solution.)

Again, this is not something I would use a goto for.

UPDATE
Fixed a thinko danger pointed out to me. last and next are not the same.

In reply to Re (tilly) 6: Fear of Large Languages (was: "Would you use goto") by tilly
in thread Would you use 'goto' here? by Ovid

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.